CNBC:
[Fire and Fury author] Michael Wolff … said administration officials and Trump confidantes he spoke to do not think the president colluded with Moscow to win the 2016 election. However,
they think if special counsel Robert Mueller looks into Trump's finances, it could be perilous for the president…. "People don't think in the White House … that he colluded with Russia…. They do think that if the investigation goes near his finances, he's sunk."
That'll do. Any crime related to collusion would also do, but there's no reason that anti-Trumpers are particularly intent on collusion only — or more likely, obstruction of justice. Any crime that renders Trump's head on a poleax — if nothing else (see below), in the history books — will be of vindicating comfort for us and most all Americans. And when it comes to Trump's finances, the possibilities are nearly limitless. Observed Paul Waldman two months ago:
Trump is right that he never invested in Russia. But a whole lot of Russians invested in him — more than just a condo here and there. In fact, Russians, including a large number of oligarchs and mobsters, have bought hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Trump properties over the years, in many cases apparently as a means of laundering money…. Trump's business career [is also] full of scams like Trump University, vendors he refused to pay, labor law violations, and deals he managed to slip out of while leaving others holding the bag.
As for Waldman's perfectly rational assessment of Trump's money-laundering schemes, compare it to Trump's characteristic rambling in a July, NYT interview:
NYT: If Mueller was looking at your finances and your family finances, unrelated to Russia — is that a red line? Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?
TRUMP: I would say yeah. I would say yes. By the way, I would say, I don't — I don't — I mean, it's possible there's a condo or something, so, you know, I sell a lot of condo units, and somebody from Russia buys a condo, who knows? I don't make money from Russia. In fact, I put out a letter saying that I don't make — from one of the most highly respected law firms, accounting firms. I don't have buildings in Russia. They said I own buildings in Russia. I don't. They said I made money from Russia. I don't. It's not my thing. I don't, I don't do that.
What still puzzles — me, anyway — is why Trump hasn't yet sacked Bob Mueller, who is stalking this criminal president like a badger would a prairie dog. Months ago, before the entire GOP plunged into the used toilet bowl of Trumpism, the general consensus was that not only congressional Democrats but Republicans too would erupt in outrage — and reappoint Mueller — if the president were to fire the special counsel. That seems much less likely today.
Chances are, congressional Republicans would merely stroke their chins, and other body parts, while concluding yada yada yada yada yada. You know the rhetorical drills, since we've heard each a hundred times. Well, the president has a right to … Well, this doesn't really rise to the level of impeachment … Well, Bob Mueller got carried away … Well, Bob Mueller's investigation was a partisan hatchet job … Well, this isn't actually obstruction of justice … well, well, well — the upshot of all of them being that this swindling popinjay of a jackanapes can do any goddamn thing he likes, because, as Mitch McConnell has pretty much said, he'll sign whatever legislative atrocity we put before him.
So why, I ask, would Trump wait for Mueller's impeachment referral or indictments? Why wouldn't he just can him — now? What's the risk? That everyone but his base, for the umpteenth time, will say bad things about him? Seriously?
